Hillary—The Sociopath Who Would Be President

It has been estimated that one in 25 Americans is a sociopath. As described by Dr. Martha Stout in The Sociopath Next Door, a sociopath is a person who lacks a conscience and whose behavior is marked by deceitfulness, irritability, and lack of remorse or responsibility when causing harm to others. “Not everyone has a conscience,” Dr. Stout explains. “Some people will never experience the exquisite angst that results from letting others down, or hurting them, or depriving them, or even killing them.” Sociopaths are often charming and charismatic, but their main concern is for themselves and they often blame others for the things that they do. They have a complete disregard for rules and lie constantly. “It is not that this group fails to grasp the difference between good and bad,” says Dr. Stout, “it is that the distinction fails to limit their behavior. Without the slightest blip of guilt or remorse, one in 25 people can do anything at all.” Hillary Rodham Clinton fits the profile perfectly, especially this trait: a grandiose sense of self-worth, as in “Someday the world will realize how special I am.” Sound familiar?

Clinton’s persona is notable for the lack of a moral center, which is the defining characteristic of sociopaths. A penchant for not accepting responsibility has been observable throughout her public career. In her email server scandal, Clinton has acted as though she is above the law. When four Americans were murdered on her watch in the Benghazi disaster, Clinton defended herself by saying, “What difference does it make?” As secretary of state, she traded government favors for contributions to the Clinton Foundation and then lied about it. This week, Mrs. Clinton has done it again. Fox News reported that when questioned about the Harvey Weinstein scandal, she said, “This kind of behavior cannot be tolerated anywhere, whether it’s in entertainment or politics.” But when asked about the allegations of sexual predation made against Bill Clinton by numerous women—Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones, and others—her evasive response was, “That has all been litigated. That was the subject of a huge investigation in the late 90s and there were conclusions drawn. That was clearly in the past.”

The question I wanted the interviewer to put to Mrs. Clinton was this: “How do you distinguish between Harvey Weinstein using his power and influence to take advantage of a 23-year-old actress and Bill Clinton using his power and influence to take advantage of a 23-year-old intern?” Clearly, they are indistinguishable. If anything, Bill’s behavior was worse because we have a right to expect more from the president than we do from a Hollywood producer. Not so for Mrs. Clinton. Weinstein’s behavior is intolerable, she says, but the same behavior when applied to her husband apparently is not. Mrs. Clinton is a champion when it comes to reinterpreting the facts to suit her personal agenda.

Devious as this may be, something much more troubling can be found in Mrs. Clinton’s interview. She managed to sneak in the accusation that, “After all, we have someone admitting to being a sexual assaulter in the Oval Office.” My first reaction was, “Is she speaking about her husband? No. It can’t be.” Then I realized that she was referring to Donald Trump, flushing him down the same toilet as Harvey Weinstein while giving “Slick Willie” a complete pass. According to Mrs. Clinton—who came very close to becoming the sociopath in the White House—Trump is guilty of sexual assault. This is an out-and-out lie. The sole justification for Clinton’s accusation was the Access Hollywood tape in which Trump’s off-color remarks, for which he has apologized, did not include any admission of sexual assault. But Mrs. Clinton didn’t allow the facts to interfere with her version of events any more than she did when she claimed that she came under sniper fire in Bosnia. It is significant to note that while Fox reported Mrs. Clinton’s accusation against Trump, a similar CNN story did not mention it at all.

The hypocrisy of her self-anointed role as defender of women is exposed when she defends her husband’s sex crimes. Covering up her husband’s vile behavior and falsely accusing Donald Trump are manifestations of Mrs. Clinton’s sociopathology, as is the attempt to blame her election loss on everyone else from Trump to the media to the Russians. By extension, the same can be said of the Democratic Party, a party that has consistently lied about its suppression of minorities and its contempt for the US Constitution. Democrats live by the Machiavellian adage of “the end justifies the means.” The self-serving behavior of party apparatchiks like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi is devoid of a moral center.

“Sociopaths are almost invariably seen as bad or diabolical by mental health professionals,” says Dr. Stout. “Not to care at all about the effects of our actions on friends, on family, on our children? What on earth would that be like?” The answer: It would be like Hillary Clinton. While it may be difficult to accept that sociopaths like Mrs. Clinton inhabit positions of power, it offers all the more reason why we need to identify them and seek protection from their amoral behavior.

Ed Brodow is a political commentator, negotiation expert, and author of Tyranny of the Minority: How the Left is Destroying America.

Ed Brodow is a conservative political commentator, negotiation expert, and regular contributor to Newsmax, Daily Caller, American Thinker, Townhall, LifeZette, Media Equalizer, Reactionary Times, and other online news magazines. He is the author of eight books including his latest blockbuster, Trump’s Turn: Winning the New Civil War.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.